Conta a história de Declan Harp, em sua campanha para romper o monopólio da empresa Hudson Bay no comércio de peles no Canadá.Conta a história de Declan Harp, em sua campanha para romper o monopólio da empresa Hudson Bay no comércio de peles no Canadá.Conta a história de Declan Harp, em sua campanha para romper o monopólio da empresa Hudson Bay no comércio de peles no Canadá.
- Prêmios
- 19 indicações no total
Explorar episódios
Avaliações em destaque
There are some good points to this show, so let's get them out of the way first. It's half-decent acting, scenic locations, an intriguing plot twist that sends the protagonist - by accident - into the New World and straight into a nasty conflict on the colonial frontier. It's also the fact there aren't that many shows about the Canadian fur trade and the rough-and tumble era of early colonization....and this show tries to elevate the profile of our country, so to speak.
OK, onto the flaws and problems. The history, as is depicted on film here, was never this interesting or this violent, this 'sexy". It is hard to find actual accounts of armed confrontations between different fur traders or these episodes of almost guerrila warfare in the boreal bush. So, 'Frontier' is using some seriously creative licence here. Also, lot of the characters are cast as inept, drunk, corrupt or morally deficient...or combination of all. They steal and kill, almost at will. I understand that the show's creators were keen on portraying conflict; let's at least try to portray conflict realistically. One had to be competent to stay alive and prosper on the frontier. Things like trying to kidnap a chief's son (in order to force a tribe to negotiate) would have been exceedingly stupid. And the folks who ruled the colony still ruled it...by a rule of law. The setting looks like it's supposed to be somewhere in the northern Laurentians in Quebec but could also be northern Ontario...but is actually Newfoundland. We are not told at the onset as to what year it is. Big mistake in my opinion. Doing a period piece requires an attention to detail. For instance, an English officer in a redcoat, even in the wilds, would have worn longish hair in a pony-tail or perhaps a wig, and no beards would have been seen on any of these men, in the late 1700s and very early 1800s. The French Canadian and Metis trappers and fur dealers would have had a very specific look to them, as well. A woman running the bar at the company fort would not have worn trousers - maybe for riding a horse but never for work in a public place. Also, no matter how much a governor of a fort would have screwed up, he would not have been murdered/summarily executed by another big official. It's too outlandish. At worst, they would have been sent back to England and 'retired' with some kind of a pension and told to shut up. Anyways, a lot of creative license is at work here, with trying to make the Hudson's Bay Company and its times seem more interesting and more dramatic than it really was.
OK, onto the flaws and problems. The history, as is depicted on film here, was never this interesting or this violent, this 'sexy". It is hard to find actual accounts of armed confrontations between different fur traders or these episodes of almost guerrila warfare in the boreal bush. So, 'Frontier' is using some seriously creative licence here. Also, lot of the characters are cast as inept, drunk, corrupt or morally deficient...or combination of all. They steal and kill, almost at will. I understand that the show's creators were keen on portraying conflict; let's at least try to portray conflict realistically. One had to be competent to stay alive and prosper on the frontier. Things like trying to kidnap a chief's son (in order to force a tribe to negotiate) would have been exceedingly stupid. And the folks who ruled the colony still ruled it...by a rule of law. The setting looks like it's supposed to be somewhere in the northern Laurentians in Quebec but could also be northern Ontario...but is actually Newfoundland. We are not told at the onset as to what year it is. Big mistake in my opinion. Doing a period piece requires an attention to detail. For instance, an English officer in a redcoat, even in the wilds, would have worn longish hair in a pony-tail or perhaps a wig, and no beards would have been seen on any of these men, in the late 1700s and very early 1800s. The French Canadian and Metis trappers and fur dealers would have had a very specific look to them, as well. A woman running the bar at the company fort would not have worn trousers - maybe for riding a horse but never for work in a public place. Also, no matter how much a governor of a fort would have screwed up, he would not have been murdered/summarily executed by another big official. It's too outlandish. At worst, they would have been sent back to England and 'retired' with some kind of a pension and told to shut up. Anyways, a lot of creative license is at work here, with trying to make the Hudson's Bay Company and its times seem more interesting and more dramatic than it really was.
The first couple of seasons are good but the third season is anticlimactic. Here are the issues I have with the show:
1.The episodes mention the location of every scene but you'll have no idea otherwise.
2.Jason Momoa as charismatic as he is offers no character development like all characters. He justifies his character, the same can't be said for a few others.
3.the accents oh my god, the accents. The Spanish sailer in the third season and the French broker have especially disappointing dialogue deliveries.
4. The third season sucked balls. That's all I can say without spoiling it for the rest of you. I was hoping for some sort of plot but they just seemed to be winging it like the good ol' bollywood movies.
Bottomline: it's good enough to Netflix and chill
2.Jason Momoa as charismatic as he is offers no character development like all characters. He justifies his character, the same can't be said for a few others.
3.the accents oh my god, the accents. The Spanish sailer in the third season and the French broker have especially disappointing dialogue deliveries.
4. The third season sucked balls. That's all I can say without spoiling it for the rest of you. I was hoping for some sort of plot but they just seemed to be winging it like the good ol' bollywood movies.
Bottomline: it's good enough to Netflix and chill
I can't believe it's been cancelled. I thoroughly enjoyed this series, and I thought the acting, writing, and directing were all on point. Sad to see that it won't continue.
Particularly if you are a fan of Jason Momoa, this show is worth checking out. If you like seeing examples of colonial-era British forces getting stood up to, frontiersmen doing frontier stuff, First Nations tribesmen doing their best to survive against European encroachment, and cool looking costumes and settings, then it's worth checking out. It's not for the faint of heart, however. The fights are violent and bloody and there is plenty of torture and abuse of women and PoC by Europeans.
Very enjoyable. I was pleased with just about everything. I understood going into it, it was not a History Course at some University. So the inaccuracy didn't bother me. This is not a Documentary nor is it given the loosely labeled true story. Another common criticism was their accents. I didn't care about that either, I'm no linguist. People need to stop expecting an education from Hollywood and just relax and enjoy.
Unfortunately like so many other series it was canceled and canceled without an ending. That's my biggest issue. So if you haven't started watching, don't. You'll be left unfulfilled.
Unfortunately like so many other series it was canceled and canceled without an ending. That's my biggest issue. So if you haven't started watching, don't. You'll be left unfulfilled.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesA central element in the story is the Hudson's Bay Company. This was one of three such enterprises of the British Empire; the other two being the British East India Company, which operated in and around the Indian subcontinent, and the Moscovy company, which focused on Russia and the region to the south, which includes modern day Iraq and Iran. The role of the colonies was to strengthen and enrich the British Empire, and these enterprises were created by the crown specifically for this dual purpose. The military element was there not only for protection of British interests, but for the enforcement of the will of the company and, by extension, the crown.
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
Detalhes
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente